The 14th Round Table on international humanitarian law was held on 13 and 14 September 1989 at the International Institute of Humanitarian Law in San Remo. Its theme was “Rules of international humanitarian law governing the conduct of hostilities in non-international armed conflicts”.

In view of the large number of participants (about 150), it was decided to form two working groups and divide the Round Table topic into two sub-topics. The Round Table was to study first the general rules governing the conduct of hostilities in non-international armed conflicts (sub-topic A) and then the prohibitions and restrictions on the use of certain weapons in non-international armed conflicts (subtopic B).

The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 provide that medical personnel and equipment shall in general be identified by the distinctive emblem of the red cross or red crescent. The Second Geneva Convention, applicable to the victims of conflict at sea, specifies that the exterior surfaces of hospital ships and smaller craft used for medical purposes shall be white and recommends that the parties to the conflict use “the most modern methods” to facilitate identification of medical transports at sea (Art. 43).

There is something extremely paradoxical about the modern world. Different societies have become increasingly interdependent, the solutions to the problems facing them impossible to separate, yet at the same time the diversity of those societies is very marked, whether it stems from their growing disparity in terms of development or from the desire of individuals and communities to affirm their identity. As the twentieth century draws to a close, the challenge is to lay the foundations of the true spirit of human fellowship required to reduce disparities and inequality while respecting differences and identities.

Like war itself, which was one of the first and will undoubtedly be the last of mankind's social activities, the effort to regulate violent confrontations has a long history. Indeed, the laws of war in ancient China, 400 and 500 years before Christ, the chivalry of mediaeval knights, and the modern law of armed conflict, which started to take shape in the mid-nineteenth century, are but a few examples of the countless attempts made by different political regimes and legal systems to humanize the use of weapons as a means of settling disputes between States, and even between rulers and those they govern. Colombia is no stranger to this civilizing tradition. On the contrary, its history contains a number of illustrious precedents. The fact that they have fallen into oblivion makes them no less binding on the parties to the conflict ravaging the country at present.

In its November-December 1989 issue the International Review of the Red Cross inaugurated a series of articles on the Fundamental Principles of the Movement. By inviting eminent theoreticians and active members of the National Societies and the League to give their views, and by publishing planned ICRC studies on the subject, the Review intends to contribute to the broad reflection which the Movement has been carrying out for the past three years and to the collection of treatises and case studies on various means of implementing the Principles.

The Council of the International Institute of Humanitarian Law, meeting in Taormina on 7 April 1990,

basing itself on the work and the conclusions of the 14th Round Table on humanitarian law, organized by the International Institute of Humanitarian Law and held under its auspices at San Remo on 13 and 14 September 1989,

James Surget made no impact on history. He did, however, make an impression on Washington Ford. The latter sued him in 1866 regarding the destruction of 200 bales of cotton.

In May 1862, Ford owned a plantation in Mississippi, a state then in rebellion against United States authority. The local commander of rebelling forces ordered his troops to burn all cotton along the Mississippi River that was vulnerable to capture by the United States army. Surget assisted in the destruction of Ford's cotton. Ford sued him to recover for its value.

The League General Assembly held its VIIth session from 23–26 October 1989 in Geneva. The session was attended by about 400 delegates from 144 National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.

At the opening ceremony, the League President, Mr. Mario Villarroel Lander, said: “The future of the League lies in the hands of all of us who are here today. We, as its present leaders, have great responsibilities to face, but it is essentially on you that its success depends; for it is you, as representatives of a world-wide organization, who will have to plan and carry out its new strategies”.

Law and war make poor bedfellows — particularly since the adoption of the Charter of the United Nations — and it is to be hoped that one day the former will prevail definitively over the latter. The United Nations Secretary-General has done the Review the honour of contributing a paper to this special issue devoted to prohibitions or restrictions on the use of certain conventional weapons. (See p. 469). In his message he reminds us that war has not yet been completely subjugated by the law and that every effort remains to be made in that direction. Alas, war — and hence the law of war — are still very topical subjects at the moment.

The historical importance of the principles and ideals that influence human activities can be measured by their expansion, their impact and their duration.

It is humanity's instinct for self-preservation that has made the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement what it is—a vital force that has for decades played a decisive part in enriching human values; after 125 years of life it has lost none of its attraction, its influence is widespread and its membership steadily growing. Unquestionably its influence extends throughout the world, even though its development is beset with difficulties.

A hazy or changeable concept, communication in its modern form as a technique for sending and receiving messages does not fit into any single or standard discipline. It extends outside the areas in which attempts are made to confine it, from the range of application of the humanities to the operational zones of telecommunications empires. After the ethnologists and sociologists, the linguists and the systems experts, the cyberneticists and the psychiatrists had attributed diverse meanings to it, communication in the broad sense and in its day-to-day reality entered its operational period in the 1980s with the new technology of information and communication.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (hereinafter called “the ICRC”), represented by Mr. Cornelio Sommaruga, President, and by Mr. Yves Sandoz, Director, on the one hand, and

the League of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (hereinafter called “the League”), represented by Mr. Mario Villarroel Lander, President, and Mr. Pär Stenbäck, Secretary General, on the other hand,

At a time when non-international armed conflicts are increasing in number, it may be interesting to examine the implementation of international humanitarian law (IHL) applicable in these conflicts. To ensure its respect in international armed conflict, this law provides for the penal repression of certain violations. Used with discernment, especially for preventive purposes, this is undoubtedly an effective measure. There is good reason, therefore, also in view of the work of the International Law Commission (ILC) on a draft code of crimes against the peace and security of mankind, to see whether penal repression of the violations of international humanitarian law applicable in non-international armed conflicts should be promoted.

Today, as in a dream, I look back on my life as a volunteer, on what I have learned and what it has taught me about the world. At once I am reminded of what the Red Cross meant to me as a child and young person, and what it now means to me as an adult, after twenty years' personal and professional experience. My experience as a volunteer has led me to a post in which I am both a professional and an individual working as a volunteer (National First-aid Director of the Colombian Red Cross Society). The following thoughts arise from that experience.

It is a truism to say that technical progress is not always beneficial to mankind because it also leads to the development of more sophisticated - i.e. more deadly - weapons. Any attempts to prohibit or restrict their use on the basis of international agreements come up against major obstacles. Even if only to ensure their own national security, States try to equip their armies with the most up-to-date weapons and, if possible, ones more sophisticated than those in a potential enemy's arsenal. But using a certain type of weapon cannot be justified if it runs counter to the general principles of law and humanity.

Our remarks do not refer to particularly devastating and indiscriminate weapons such as atomic, bacteriological and chemical weapons; rather it limits itself to conventional weapons. To date, a ban on such weapons has been accepted only for those which, in view of the disparity between their military effectiveness and the degree of superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering they cause, are without any real interest as means of combat (i.e. dum-dum bullets, non-detectable fragments, exploding booby-traps in the form of harmless-looking objects). As regards militarily effective weapons (incendiary devices and mines), we cannot but hope that their use will be confined as far as possible to the actual combatants so as to avoid indiscriminate harm to civilians, civilian objects and the environment.

In 1987 the Council of Delegates, recognizing the “solidarity of image” which exists between the various components of the Movement worldwide, invited the ICRC and the League to explore with National Societies “new and more systematic ways of promoting, whenever circumstances allow, public awareness of the Movement as a whole rather than its individual parts”.